Features of the Rule-Making Activity of the Constitutional Court of Russia, the Constitutional Court of Belarus and the Constitutional Council of Kazakhstan

The article discusses the features of the rule-making activity of the constitutional review bodies of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. The authors investigated the law and practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus and the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The main research methods were formal legal (used to study texts of the laws of the three countries) and comparative legal (used to determine the general and the specific). The functional method was applied to study the main directions of the constitutional review bodies' activities. The authors identified the advantages and disadvantages of the rule-making activity and its influence on the legal system by identifying the constitutional conditions, in which any given legal procedures may be implemented. In the study, the authors found that the rule-making activity is manifested in the activities of the constitutional review bodies under study when they implement their powers. In particular, preliminary constitutional review is, in fact, a special element of the legislative procedure. In the preliminary review, the Constitutional Court of Belarus and the Constitutional Council of Kazakhstan are forced to consider the law as a whole: already passed, but not signed. Despite the fact that the constitutional review bodies are independent and not subject to the legislative process, they are part of the legislative process, which is generally consistent with the National Parliament. The Constitutional Court (Council) takes into account that it is part of the legislative process; thus, for example, the time of consideration is reduced. In Belarus, the case of verifying the constitutionality of laws adopted by Parliament, in the order of obligatory preliminary review, is considered in no more than five days from the date the Constitutional Court receives the law. In Kazakhstan, this time, at the request of the President, is reduced to ten days. It is established that, in case of unconstitutionality, the Constitutional Court of Belarus, as well as the Constitutional Council of Kazakhstan, allots a task to the legislative bodies right away. They additionally start the legislative procedure to amend the existing laws. The article explains the scientific, constitutional, political, and legal significance of the rule-making activity and the participatory rule-making of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus, and the Constitutional Council of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The authors conclude that the correcting (amending) of the legal positions of the constitutional review bodies of the three countries under study is consistent with international practice. At the same time, in the national legislation of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, there are no criteria of the right to revise their own positions because of "change of circumstances", as well as a detailed mechanism of such a review. Specialised bodies of constitutional review in Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan reserve the right to decide when and under what circumstances the legal positions will be revised.

Keywords

Authors

References